Ray Ison, Professor in Systems at the UK Open University since 1994, is a member of the Applied Systems Thinking in Practice Group. From 2008-15 he also developed and ran the Systemic Governance Research Program at Monash University, Melbourne. In this blog he reflects on contemporary issues from a systemic perspective.

Monday, December 01, 2014

Vastely different contexts but essentially the same issue and need - governance failure and a need for systemic governance reform.

The first an article by Thomas Friedman looks to the Middle East and the litany of policy failures, particularly by the US and its allies. He says:"Ever since the Arab awakening in late 2010, America has lurched from
one policy response to another. We tried decapitation without invasion
in Libya; it failed. We tried abdication in Syria; it failed. We tried
democratisation in Egypt, endorsing the election of the Muslim
Brotherhood; it failed. We tried invasion, occupation, abdication and
now re-intervention in Iraq and, although the jury is still out, only a
fool would be optimistic.

Maybe the beginning of wisdom is
admitting that we don't know what we're doing out here and, more
important, we don't have the will to invest overwhelming force for the
time it would take to reshape any of these places – and, even if we did,
it is not clear it would work.

So if the Middle East is a region we can neither fix nor ignore, what's left? I'm for "containment" and "amplification"."

So what is amplification and containment? Friedman goes on to explain what he means:"How so? Where there is disorder – Iraq, Syria, Yemen,
Libya – collaborate with regional forces to contain it, which is
basically what we're doing today. I just hope we don't get in more
deeply. Where there is imposed order – Egypt, Algeria – work quietly
with the government to try to make that order more decent, just,
inclusive and legitimate. Where there is already order and
decency – Morocco, Jordan, Lebanon, Kurdistan and the United Arab
Emirates – do everything to amplify it, so it becomes more consensual
and sustainable. And where there is order, decency and
democracy – Tunisia – give them as much money as they ask for (which we
haven't done).

But never forget: We can only amplify what they do. When we start
change or it depends on our staying power, it is not
self-sustaining – the most important value in international relations.
When it starts with them, it can be self-sustaining."

Friedman's claim that 'when it starts with them, it can be self sustaining' could well be understood as a rallying call for governance reform as much in the USA, or in fact any nation, as in the Middle East. The USA and Israel fostered systemic failure of democratic emergence when they failed to appreciate what Hamas had to do to become, and would have had to do to stay as, the elected government of Gaza. The same could be said of Egypt. Equally the case of the Federal seat of Indi, in Victoria, Australia, won through a grass roots campaign that threw out the local sitting member, speaks to Friedman's adage of ...when it starts with them.....!

Friedman's claims extend beyond political governance to that of how we govern our relations with the biophysical world and with other species. The second case I want to highlight is a new report which concerns the runaway over exploitation of our forests:

“Throughout the tropics, staggering amounts of land have
been designated for natural resource extraction—as much as 40 percent of Peru,
30 percent of Indonesia and 35 percent of Liberia. However, much of this land
is already in use; it is being inhabited by local communities and indigenous
peoples. And while it is possible to live on and extract resources from the
same land, when local communities are not consulted in this exchange, conflict
may erupt.”

This is systemic failure of governance of the most perverse kind because the circumstances for determining their futures are denied to local and indigenous communities. It is the same issue with the Tanzanian government's attempts to exclude the Masai from their traditional lands.

These pressing challenges directly confront the relevance of contemporary research practice - particularly in the social domain. Victor Galaz recently wrote that:

"Having spent years and years in academia writing papers, and attending
scientific conferences, workshops and meetings I’ve come to realize that
social science scholars, including myself, are failing. The social
sciences clearly have a lot of important things to say about global
risks. But knowledge is becoming so specialized and fragmented, that I
sincerely fear it is loosing touch with the risks posed by the
interacting environmental and socio-technological unfolding around us..........This fragmentation is not only troubling but also downright
dangerous. The next generation of decision-makers and social scientists
not only need to disrupt disciplinary barriers, but also base their work
from the observation that tomorrow’s global environmental risks are
dynamic. When the G20 this weekend gathers to discuss proposals to
reform global institutions, the emphasis should not only be placed on
the international community’s ability to prevent and respond to global
risks. It should also explore alternative models of governance able to
help break paralyzing political “gridlocks”; navigate the potential
transgression of devastating ecological and biophysical thresholds; and
promote innovation that span beyond quick techno-fixes. And last but not
least: promote international institutional reforms that are perceived
by the general public as transparent, and legitimate."

It is not only research practice but the design of public policy. Take for example the situation with the locally-based Landcare model in Australia. As outlined recently:

Among the environmental fallout of the federal budget, Australia’s Landcare program has taken a hit, losing A$484 million. In return, the government’s environmental centrepiece, the Green Army, receives A$525 million. But switching money from Landcare to the Green Army is trading down
for a less effective conservation model. It also repeats a pattern of
reduced funding and weakened delivery started under former Prime
Minister John Howard, and confuses improved agricultural productivity
with improved environmental management.

This is yet another example of command and control approaches to policy development which undermine institutions that enable governance that is self-sustaining because it begins with them!

At least a conversation of sorts is starting around this important issue. The Victorian election on Saturday can only add more evidence for the need for reform whether it is the way the upper house seats are now being determined by complex preference deals that game 'the system' to the fact that with over 11% of the primary vote the Greens only have one lower house candidate elected (although they look like having five in the upper house).

Of course representative politics is but one aspect of the need for governance reform.

Unless universities are willing to bet on the destruction of
the planet they have committed themselves to understanding and preserving,
divestment from fossil fuels is the only choice they can make. Forward-thinking
investors of all kinds would be wise to follow suit."

Tuesday, November 25, 2014

The after dinner speaker at a recent Peter Cullen Trust meeting was John Hewson, former leader of the Australian Liberal party who is now a strident critic of much that is being done (and not done) by the incumbent Federal Liberal/National Party government. It was for me a very inspiring talk. Why? Because I experienced it as authentic, well reasoned, and evidenced a person who was prepared to 'walk his talk'.

I was particularly impressed by the work that John and
colleagues are doing under the aegis of "The Asset Owners Disclosure Project" (AODP). This is "an independent not-for-profit global organisation
whose objective is to protect members' retirement savings from the risks posed
by climate change by improving the level of disclosure and industry best
practice." It is worth looking at the interview with John at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas in Sydney, Australia, located on the project website where he discusses "how your pension is destroying the planet." I sincerely hope his work contributes to accelerated growth of the divestment movement.

The AODP has created an index "following information requests to the world’s 1000
largest asset owners including over 800 pension funds, 80 insurance
companies, 50 sovereign wealth funds and 30 foundations/endowments.
Together, they manage more than US$70 trillion". The index supports the aim of AODP to "help funds to redress the huge imbalance in
their investments between high-carbon assets (50-60% of a portfolio) and
low-carbon assets (typically less than 2%) and realign the
investment chain to adopt long-term investment practices".

What is particularly impressive is that John has understood the science of climate change for a long time and has been a consistent advocate for innovation and change that moves us collectively towards a post-carbon society. Of course this is yet another commitment that places him out of sympathy with the current Australian government, who have clearly been shown at the recent G20 meeting to be out of step with the rest of the world.

Since becoming aware of the AODP project I have wondered if
those involved in the project and those who support its aims are also aware of
some broader systemic issues that also warrant transformation?For example, Simon Caulkin, a former management
editor of the Observer (UK), has been one of the most consistent critics of the
distortions in management understandings and practices that now seem to be
taken for granted. In a recent article he explains how these insights emerged
for him:

“….management didn’t do what it said on the tin, and now,
knitting together what I had sensed before, I thought I could see why, although
I struggled to express it.

But although I had most of the pieces, the final epiphany
only came later. It arrived in three parts. One was at a conference in Brussels
last February, put on by an enterprising Czech-based NGO, the Frank Bold
Society, on The Purpose of the Corporation. The briefing included a memo which
set out the legal position in black and white: across jurisdictions, as a
matter of law, shareholders don’t own the corporation, and directors’ fiduciary
duty is to the company with which they have a contract. So in brief,
shareholder capitalism, and the whole theory of corporate governance that has
evolved to sustain it, including the assumptions about human nature and
behaviour that it is supposed to control, is based on a myth.

The second ‘aha’ moment was at a Vanguard conference on
health, some of the profound findings of which I wrote about here. One of them
was that the thinking that would make the difference between a manageable and
unmanageable NHS was not inherently difficult: it was just different. So
different, in fact, that the existing management worldview couldn’t be modified
to incorporate it – change could only come if that worldview was replaced. That
helped to explain why initial resistance to the ideas was so strong.

The third element was an invitation to a workshop put on by
the alumni of the Open University’s Systems Thinking in Practice course. The
aim of the event was to give support and sustenance to systems thinkers who,
for the reasons outlined above, could easily find themselves isolated and
discouraged at work. I had expected to be interested and stimulated by the
occasion, but it turned out to be rather more than that. Slightly unwillingly I
found myself participating in an exercise designed to draw the lessons from a
situation where systems thinking had helped in the past and consider how to
apply them again in the future.

Bingo! Suddenly, reflecting on my trajectory, I could see
what had been staring me in the face all along. It’s a system, stupid. The
management apparatus that has been developed in business school and university
economics and finance departments to further shareholder value and control is
all of a piece, from governance, through the measures and techniques used,
right down to performance management on the shop or call-centre floor. If the
organising principle of shareholder primacy can’t be justified, it’s not an
accident that so much of management designed around it is ‘wrong’ – the
surprise would be if any of it were right.”

“Starting in the 1980s, elite business schools began
teaching future managers and investors that the only metric that matters is
shareholder value. This was a dramatic change, as throughout most of its
history American capitalism had operated on a stakeholder model in which
managers sought to balance the interests of multiple stakeholders, including
investors, customers, employees, and local communities. The shareholder-value
revolution created a short-term quarterly earnings culture, a bias toward
sweating assets versus building them, a view that employees are a cost to be
managed rather than human capital to be invested in, and a love of debt. It
also made CEOs and their top managers immensely rich by showering them with
stock options. While CEO compensation shot upwards, corporate debt levels
climbed, R&D spending dropped, and employee churn and temporary work rose.”

John Menadue, and a series of posting by Ian McAuley explore some of these broader systemic issues that raise serious concerns about the status and institutions of contemporary capitalism.

Tuesday, November 18, 2014

With the support of Walk91 and the company of spouse and friends I recently spent six days completing the GOW. It was a rewarding time with great views and countryside, good conversation and excellent food. I would highly recommend the experience, though do not attempt it in hot weather - the last half day near the Twelve Apostles was through coastal heath without any shade and a temperature of 31 degrees C, I found almost too much.

Abstract: In his 1972
paper, "Responsibilities of Competence", Heinz von Foerster calls on
cyberneticians to accept their responsibilities for the realities they
construct and to use their competencies as cyberneticians
to act for the good. In my lecture, I review the thinking that led
Heinz to make this call. I then briefly overview, as best I can
holistically and globally, the many problems for which call for the
competencies of the cybernetician. These problems can be
usefully distinguished as first and second order problems. I focus on
the second order problems that are presented by pathological belief
systems: of which I distinguish two kinds: "individualism" and "the
dogmas of collectives". I review some of the main
forms that these pathologies may take. Using concepts from cybernetics
as a foundation, I go on to argue that, although these pathologies may
never be fully eradicated from human thinking and ways of behaving, they
can be minimised by education of the right
kind: education for cybernetic enlightenment.

Bernard Scott

Dr Bernard Scott
graduated from Brunel University, UK, in 1968 with a first class
honours degree in Psychology. He completed a Ph.D. in Cybernetics from
the same university
in 1976. His supervisor was Gordon Pask, with whom he worked between
1967 and 1978. Bernard is former Head of the Flexible Learning Support
Centre, UK Defence Academy and former Reader in Cybernetics, Cranfield
University, UK. He retired from these positions
in August, 2009, and September, 2010, respectively. He now works as an
independent researcher. He holds an honorary position as Senior Research
Fellow with the Center for Sociocybernetics Studies, Bonn. Bernard is a
Fellow and founder member of the U.K.'s
Cybernetics Society. He is an Associate Fellow of the British
Psychological Society, a Fellow of the American Society for Cybernetics
and an Academician of the International Academy of Systems and
Cybernetics Sciences. Bernard is Past President of Research
Committee 51 (on Sociocybernetics) of the International Sociological
Association. In 2013, Bernard was presented with the McCulloch Award by
the American Society for Cybernetics.

II. Heinz von Foerster's Birthday Party

Thursday, 13th November 2014, 20:00

echoraum, Sechshauser Straße 66, 1150 Wien

As in earlier years echoraum (many thanks to
Werner Korn
!) opens its premises in order to celebrate Heinz von Foerster's birthday.

We present visual and audio material (including a video from the collection of
Carol Wilder, NYC, and tapes from the Heinz von Foerster archives, Vienna). With a special contribution by
Anton Staudinger.

The
Association for Water and Rural Development (AWARD) is a highly
regarded Non-Governmental Organization in the K2C area. AWARD is also
the lead agency for USAID's RESILIM-O Programme (Building of resilience
in the Limpopo Basin). The Biodiversity leg of this programme is helping
to reinforce and optimize K2C protected area partner networks in
preparation for the GEF 5 Protected Area Effectiveness programme, which
is set to start in 2015. Currently, also in support of Maruleng
Municipalities' Spatial Development Framework, the boundaries and
conservation status of the protected area network are being investigated
and mapped on GIS. GEF5 will help to ensure that the correct reserve
proclamations or biodiversity agreements will be enabled, and that the
reserves meet their management effectiveness targets. For more
information, please contact Dr Marisa Coetzee: coetzeemarisa@gmail.com or visit AWARD's Website: www.award.org.za

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

A three year Post-Doctoral Fellow post as part of a Systemic Futures Project with SANParks, South Africa has been readvertised.

The following post at MIT has also just been advertised.

FACULTY POSITION IN SYSTEM DYNAMICS

MIT Sloan School of Management

The MIT Sloan School of Management invites applications for a tenure-track faculty position in system dynamics, to begin
July 2015 (or thereafter). Candidates should have
excellent knowledge of the system dynamics simulation technique and/or
related modeling methodologies, such as nonlinear dynamics, control
theory, computer simulation or agent-based modeling,
as well as research interests relevant to the management and/or
behavioral sciences. Duties will include research and teaching at the
graduate and undergraduate levels. System dynamics at Sloan is closely
affiliated with both the management sciences and organization
studies. Applicants whose substantive research interests are
interdisciplinary are particularly invited to apply, including
applicants whose research involves the social and behavioral sciences.
We especially want to identify qualified female and minority
candidates for consideration in this position.

Applicants should possess or be close to completion of a PhD in system
dynamics or a relevant field by the start date of employment. Applicants
must submit: 1) an up-to-date curriculum vitae; 2) up to three
representative publications; 3) a brief statement
of objectives and aspirations in research and education; 4) an official
graduate transcript; 5) information about teaching experience and
performance evaluations; and 6) three letters of recommendation by
October 31, 2014.

Monday, September 22, 2014

The launching and opening ceremonies of
WOSC 2014, 16th Congress of the World Organization of Systems and Cybernetics commence on Tuesday October 14.

The Launching ceremony will be held at
UniversidadNacional
deBogotá (14th October). The Opening ceremony at the
Universidad
deIbagué, in
Ibagué Colombia where the Congress will take place.

At the launching ceremony, Dr. Humberto
Maturana will deliver a conference entitled
CIBERNETICA DE TIEMPO
CERO (Zero-Time Cybernetics), followed by a conference by Dr. Fernando Flores: EL MANAGEMENT ES UNA
PRACTICA
COMUNICATIVA (Management as a Communicative Practice). The ceremony will close with a informal conversation held by
Drs.
Maturana, Flores, Dávila, and
Espejo, with attendants to the opening ceremony.

The opening ceremony will be in
Universidad
deIbagué in
Ibagué where the 16th Congress of Systems and Cybernetics will take place.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Of course there is no such thing as a no carbon society as carbon is the basic building block of all life. But we can act to create a post-carbon society - one that does not unlock and disrupt the carbon cycle to produce adverse effects such as global warming. As I wrote in my book, 'Systems Practice: How to Act in Climate Change World' we are in a period new to human history and thus we need to critically reassess our thinking, practices, governance, institutions and investment strategies, and do it as soon as we can.

We had the first inkling of what we, as a species, could unleash upon ourselves when we invented and deployed the atomic bomb. Many of us have lived a large part of our lives with the sense that we could engage in mutual self-destruction through a nuclear war. The feeling of threat regarding nuclear war has passed although the dangers, with rogue states, and the potential for the incitement of war between nuclear states such as India and Pakistan, remain very present. (If you are sceptical I urge you to watch to the end this interview of Bruce Reidel by Charlie Rose). Unfortunately the big issues that confront us as a species are still framed and discussed in ways that negate the systemic threats they pose.

One can see this with nuclear energy. Discussions are almost universally framed as if nuclear power was a technical or economic issue. Rarely is it framed as a technology that, as with all technologies, mediates (or has the potential to mediate) our life on Earth (as well as the lives of other species). In this sense technology couples humans (lets call it a social system) to the biophysical world (or system) from which flows benign or non-benign effects to either system, or the relationship between them. Thus with nuclear power the failure to solve the waste disposal problem, recognising that it is more a social than an engineering problem, would put us on a trajectory that I, and many others, find unacceptable. Fukushima failed not because of an earthquake but because of the failure of human thinking, institutions and practices. And as our living unfolds in a climate-changing world, so too will much of our past thinking, practices, institutions etc fail us, unless we begin to think and act differently.

I feel inclined to invent a new law to describe the phenomenon that concerns me - I shall call it Ison's Law of Perverse Trajectories. To my example of over investment in nuclear power I would add continued investment in coal mining, fracking and coal seam gas as the most perverse of contemporary trajectories. Natural gas will join them soon. We have an emergency of unique proportions yet we resist the intellectual, ethical and moral imperative to move to alternative trajectories, those that will realise a post-carbon society. The Natural Step, as articulated by Karl-Henrik Robert, expressed it simply in their four system conditions: 'In the sustainable society nature is not subject to systematically increasing (i) concentrations of substances extracted from the Earth's crust (e.g. carbon, methane etc); (ii) concentrations of substances produced by society (e.g. plastics, fluorocarbons etc); (iii) degradation by physical means, and in that society (iv) human needs are met worldwide."

Given my concerns, and the state of governance today in Australia and the UK (the places I spend most of my time), I was heartened (not something that happens often) by an article written by Michael Green in yesterday's edition of The Age. The article "Mining morality or vilifying coal?" makes a strong case for divestment of shares and other holdings in companies that keep us on what I have just called a perverse trajectory i.e., a status quo trajectory rather than towards a post-carbon future. For Australia in particular, pursuit of this perverse trajectory commits the nation to being on the wrong side of history.

I commend the Uniting Church for the stand it has taken and the practical actions it is pursuing:

"In mid-July, the peak body of the Uniting Church in Australia voted to sell its investments in fossil fuels....

"We didn’t
think it was the most earth-shattering news, because it’s a pretty
mainstream issue in the Uniting Church now,” explains the church’s
president, Reverend Professor Andrew Dutney. Yet its resolution included
a moral claim that may be confronting for most Australians, who, by way
of their superannuation funds – at the very least – own a stake in
coal, oil or gas projects.

“Further
investment in the extraction of fossil fuels contributes to, and makes
it more difficult to address climate change,” the church states. Given
the harm climate change will cause, “further investment and extraction
is unethical”. “A number of people have found that to be a strong
statement,” Dutney says. “But it’s very hard to argue against.”

Australians
have two key facts to consider, he says: we’re among the world’s highest
emitters of carbon dioxide, per person; and on top of that, we have
enormous reserves of coal set to be exported for electricity generation.

“If we were to
extract and burn all those reserves, then global warming will be much
more disastrous for the poorer nations who are our neighbours.”

Andrew Dutney articulates well the case for abandoning our current trajectory. I hope to see the divestment movement grow in strength, the case for which ought to be strengthened by recent decisions in China about coal imports, triggered by the horrific pollution now affecting almost every Chinese city:

"According to an analysis by Macquarie Bank, consultant Wood Mackenzie
has indicated the ban could affect more than half of Australia's
thermal coal exports to China, although the ban is also likely to hit
Indonesian coal."

In the end it may well be coal industry economics that achieves the ambitions of divestment. I cannot help but feel this 'realpolitik' was behind the recent plans to restructure by BHP Billiton. In the meantime we should all use whatever leverage we have to facilitate further divestment - to move away from the current perverse trajectory.

At the same time there needs to be organised, critical resistance to the fight back by 'big fossil fuel' This is already happening in Australia, where years of successful environmetal legislation is being rescinded in the face of an ideological onslaught by conservative state and federal governments and their supporters. In this regard one must view the recent creation of the "Reef Trust" and the Reef 2050 Plan, with deep suspicion.

For some time now governance in Australia and the UK has been systemically failing its citizens - many, if not most, decisions reduce the number of choices we humans will have as circumstances unfold, primarily because most place the relational dynamics between us and our environment on a perverse trajectory. They fail Ison's Law!! Evidence can be seen in the report today by a cross-party Environmental Audit committee in Westminster:

"The government is failing
to reduce air pollution, protect biodiversity and prevent flooding, a
cross-party body of MPs has said. The Environmental Audit Committee dished out a "red card" on these three concerns after examining efforts made since 2010.

The MPs said on a further seven green issues ministers deserved a "yellow card" denoting unsatisfactory progress."

Not surprisingly, though in the absence of evidence to the contrary:

"The government said it strongly disagreed with the findings. After coming to power in 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron stated he was committed to leading the "greenest government ever"."
.
The most perverse of perverse trajectories are those where technologies, if they fail, destroy or severely impair the lives of future generations. Nuclear waste, the irreversible destruction and contamination of aquifers by fracking or coal seam gas extraction, deep mining and toxic tailings (as has happened already in South Africa) are the worst of the worst!

Monday, September 15, 2014

Many children grow up with an ethos that to share is good. And in many ways it is. However I have come to realise that there is a problem with sharing and most folk, in my experience, do not realise what the problem is. The roots of the problem can be found in the propensity we have to migrate words away from their etymology and to use them in contexts which begin the insidious process of conserving semantic confusion. This is an issue I have been aware of for some time - I think courtesy of one of the many profound conversations I have had with my friend David Russell. Certainly I have warned most of my PhD students away from the deployment of 'sharing' in their writing. However I have not written about it till now, prompted by an invitation to look over an abstract developed by a colleague in which he deployed 'sharing' in ways that fueled my long-standing concerns.

Sharing is of course a verb meaning to cut into parts, to make a division, a section, a part, a piece (as in pie) or portion (as in land) or to divide up labour (from which troop derives). Etymologically share can be traced back to the old English word for shear, associated with parting the land, as happens when using a ploughshare; then followed harvest and cutting time from which one received one's share. From this can be seen how the idea of share- receiving or share-holding (as in companies, businesses etc arise). In the early Middle Ages a share was a portion of a levy imposed on fishing boats. What these different roots have in common is the idea that a share arises from a whole - in other words sharing is to do with a part-whole relationship. The other important aspect of this etymology is that sharing is grounded in materiality - there is usually something tangible, or physical to be shared, even if it is denoted by a share certificate. It is in the movement away from these etymological roots that my problem with sharing arises!

We live in a world now, where those who use English believe it is possible to share knowledge. meaning, experiences, information - in fact all sorts of abstract concepts - as if there was a part-whole relationship and as if there were some hidden materiality behind what is being shared! We have begun the process of conserving semantic inaccuracy, one that does not serve us well, because it distorts all sorts of understandings and practices in fields ranging from politics to computing. We humans live in language and it is our evolutionary past that we have in common as our living unfolds, day by day. Our cultural histories expose us to many common phenomena (i.e., we cannot escape our social embeddedness) but our experiential history is always unique - all we have at our disposal is our ability to use language (in its broadest sense) to communicate (talk, converse, dance etc) about our experiences. Thus whenever a claim is made that we share understanding, or knowledge or meaning, then we are making a claim about the status of our social relations in our conversations with others, not a state of our being.

Can we alter our trajectory - or has 'sharing' gone feral? Unfortunately there are few opportunities in contemporary education to generate the reflexivity that we need to explore, and where needed, change our manners of living in language. Perhaps we need an etymology ap that fosters the reflexivity that is needed?

If you're after a brilliant career, Monash University can help
make it happen. With leading academics and world-class resources,
combined with a ranking in the top 100 universities worldwide, we offer all you
need to build a brighter future.

The
Opportunity

The Systemic Governance Research
Program at the Monash Sustainability Institute brings a systems thinking
approach to 'wicked' or 'messy' situations in order to identify and
create the
conditions for more effective governance performances. The program
primarily
deals with the governance of water, climate change adaptation, food
security,
research for development and organisational learning. Researchers in the
program engage in transdisciplinary and collaborative action research
with a
range of organisations to enhance systemic awareness and performance in
these
fields. The program was established by Professor Ray Ison in 2008 to
explore
the practical and theoretical robustness of current water and climate
change
governance regimes, and to develop new models and strategies to make
future
governance fit for purpose in a climate-changing world. To learn more
about our program, please visit our website.

In this role, you will contribute to the
development of a new 'learning laboratory' initiative and contribute to
research inquiries into water governance in Australia. You will also contribute
generally to the research activities of the Systemic Governance Research
Program, including participating in inter and transdisciplinary research,
preparing written publications, and seeking research funding.

If you believe you have the background to undertake this research role, we encourage you to apply.
This role is a full-time position; however, flexible working arrangements may be negotiated.

Closing
Date

Senior and/or Apprentice Position
Living Lands invites applicants to fulfil the role of Landscape Mobiliser / Project Manager for Living Lands at our offices in Muizenberg for an initial period of 12 months, with the possibility of extending the contract to a permanent position.Living Lands – The Organization
The vision of Living Lands is ‘collaborations working on living landscapes*’, which represents the connection amongst stakeholders and the undertaking of learning processes. These ultimately raise social awareness and lead to collective action towards more sustainable practices. Research and innovations act as an integrated part of the knowledge created for supporting stakeholders’ decision making.

*A ‘living landscape’ comprises a variety of healthy ecosystems and land uses and is home to ecological, agricultural and social systems which are managed so as to function sustainably.Role Description
We are looking for a highly motivated and professional Landscape Mobiliser. The role of the mobiliser is to: work together with stakeholders, take a leading role in social learning/change processes on landscapes to build collective understanding of the current challenges and aspirations, and to create collective strategies and actions. The stakeholders usually include: landowners, communities, farmers, municipalities, universities, private and government agencies.

The Landscape Mobilizor is responsible for the bottom based stakeholder engagement process that forms the foundation of Living Lands’ approach. This approach is an integration of social learning, Theory U, ecosystem thinking and transdisciplinary knowledge production.

Responsibilities
 Engage with local stakeholders to create understanding and build trust;
 Mobilize and connect divergent groups of stakeholders at the landscape level: land- users, communities, NGOs and government;
 Form and maintain mutually beneficial partnerships;
 Organise learning events and workshops;
 Implement and manage different projects on the landscape, incl. admin budgets, planning, logistics and reporting;
 Represent Living Lands at meetings and workshops;
 Proposal writing;
 Pick up and elaborate on new ideas;
 Embrace and align with Living Lands’ vision and strategy;

Experience, Knowledge and Skills
The successful candidate will need to be able to multitask, be flexible and be able to empathise and communicate effectively and responsibly with stakeholders. They will also need to be able to work effectively in teams.

In general, the candidate should have interest in social change processes and natue conservation/ restoration. The following criteria apply:
 At least an honours degree, master degree is preferred ;
 Experience in (or interested in learning) managing stakeholder processes;
 Excellent communication and network skills, on all levels;
 Good project management skills - team player;
 Ability to listen and have empathy with stakeholder stories;
 Driver’s license;
 Previous experience is an advantage;
 IT proficiency to a self-supporting standard in Microsoft Office applications;
 Fluency in English is essential and Afrikaans is a plus;
 South African citizen or permanent resident.

Personal Attributes
 Passionate, results-orientated, keen eye for problem solving, responsible and a positive attitude.
 Flexible and enthusiastic attitude, able to get things done in a diplomatic way.
 Strong leadership ability and know how to handle problems quickly and efficiently.
 Appreciation for nature.
 Outstanding social interaction and inter-personal skills with the ability to motivate and inspire stakeholders, particularly project managers and staff.
 Excellent organisation and time management skills with the ability to work under pressure with changing priorities.
 Effective networker.
 Desire to continually develop and work outside of one’s comfort zone.
 Entrepreneurial spirit and ‘can do’ mentality.
 Independent working and proactive. Pioneer.Salary
A salary will be based on the relevant skills and qualifications of the candidate.

Applications
To apply for the job please send your CV (including at least three references and their relevant direct contact details) and a motivational letter describing why you would be the ideal candidate for the position to Marijn Zwinkels, marijn@livinglands.co.za, by 5pm on Friday 5 September 2014. Please note that only emailed applications will be considered.

"Join us in accelerating the convergence of design, social, and
technology fields toward co-creating humanized systems. We invite
participants, presenters and students from across disciplines and design
fields to register for the RSD3
Symposium, Oslo, Norway, October 15 – 17 2014. Hosted again this year by AHO, Oslo School of Architecture and
Design, we are reaching for a wider audience, while maintaining the
lightweight mood of a small symposium. We reviewed responses from over
70 paper proposals, and the selected
presentations and workshops are now posted. As last year, we hold a
single day of workshops offered by leading members of the design and
systems thinking fields to share their unique methods and practices. We
encourage participants to register for both the
symposium and workshops, to extend your learning and exploration into
new areas of practice. We have 6 extraordinary keynote speakers over the
two-day event:

Hugh Dubberly

Ranulph Glanville

Harold Nelson

Ann Pendleton-Jullian

Daniela Sangiorgi

John Thackara

Costs are kept low and (as we have found with previous years) the
highest value is in learning from one another in a relaxed, exploratory
approach to convening. However, you will need to book lodging and travel
to Oslo, which is better
done sooner. We have a few tips to help travelers on the symposium
site.The RSD series are convinced that integrated, more
effective systems thinking and methods are required for addressing
complex societal concerns – and our observation is that educational
programs
and design agencies are not providing the skills and knowledge
necessary to deal with systemic design issues. We believe a stronger
integration with design and design thinking is a promising way forward.Please forward this message to you connections.Register at http://www.systemic-design.netThe RSD3 Organizing CommitteeBirger, Peter, Alex, Harold, Manuela, Linda and our growing team of support."

Monday, August 18, 2014

Some may remember earlier postings I made about the systemic failings of the NPfIT? Ross Anderson, one of the group of Systems professors who wrote publically to the government about the inadequacies of NPfIT has recently "taught a systems course to students on the university’s Masters of
Public Policy course (this is like an MBA but for civil servants). For
their project work, [Ross] divided them into teams of three or four and got
them to write a case history of a public-sector IT project that went
wrong."

This year’s UKSS conference has different format and venue, with the great keynote speakers you expect.

We are pleased to be hosted by the Centre
for Systems Studies, Business School, University of Hull, starting with
a conference dinner on Thursday 11 September, followed by a day of
interesting activities including keynote speakers, papers and workshops.
Then on Saturday our friends at SCiO are holding
an open day with eight fantastic speakers.

On
Friday the speakers are Keynotes by Professor Simon Bell, Open
University, Professor Gerald Midgley,
University of Hull and Patrick Hoverstadt, SCiO. There will also be an
opportunity to present papers are contributions are encouraged by
submitting to https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=ukss2014by
31 August 2014

The Venue: Centre for Systems Studies, Business School,
University of Hull,Cottingham Rd, Hull, East Yorkshire HU6 7RX

This
year’s conference will be hosted by the Centre for Systems Studies at
the Hull University Business School, which is a leading UK business
school dedicated to the development
of responsible leadership for a complex world.

This
is great news at it takes the UKSS back to where the first Conference
was held nearly forty years ago, although if you were there
you will find things have changed as in 2005, the School moved in to
their new home, described by Sir Digby Jones, former Director General of
the CBI, as a ‘world class learning and teaching facility'. Designed
by esteemed architects Farrell and Clark, the
school is a mix of new build and redevelopment. Contemporary links
connect four Grade II listed buildings to create an inspirational yet
practical space, equipped with the latest technology.

The Programme

Once
again we are bringing together thinkers and practitioners in the fields
of systems and complexity as it seems to us that there has been a
significant international resurgence
in these areas in recent years. Delegates will benefit from cutting edge research and a lively
forum for discussion and debate will be
provided for a wide range of academics and practitioners in the fields
of systems thinking. Our aim is to bring together as many people as
possible who are engaging with the Practice of Systems Ideas in a
Knowledge Society, with the intention of promoting
an intense and lively debate with real world implications.

Thursday 11th September 2014

Conference Dinner.

Friday 12th September 2014

Keynotes by Professor Simon Bell, Open University,Professor Gerald Midgley, University of Hull and Patrick Hoverstadt, SCiO

Challenges of Knowledge Societies

Selected Papers.

Practical Workshop Case Study (subject to alteration) using and comparing:

Ketso.

Soft Systems Methodology (SSM).

Viable Systems Model (VSM)

Saturday 13th September 2014

Jointly Sponsored with SCiO; a day devoted to practitioner contributions, and workshops.

What Are Knowledge Societies?

Knowledge
Societies are identified as societies based on the creation,
dissemination and utilization of information and knowledge, i.e.
societies with an economy in which knowledge is acquired, created,
disseminated and applied to enhance economic and social development.

People living in a
knowledge society can expect that their work, leisure, social and
political lives will be dominated by creation, acquisition and
utilisation of ‘knowledge’. However, at the heart of this
concept is the idea of ‘knowledge’ itself. Great resources have been
expended by businesses wishing to know how to manage their knowledge,
since it has been acknowledged that the only sustainable source of
competitive advantage that an organisation has is
the know-how of the people it employs. Yet knowledge remains
problematic. It is contained within people and created by them through
interactions in groups, using physical and financial resources. People
may or may not know that they have it. Efforts to
make human knowledge explicit, and capture it for the benefit of others
may be more or less successful. It is perhaps more accurate to refer
to human knowing, since it is dynamic rather than static.

Call for Contributions

We invite contributions from systems thinkers from a wide variety of backgrounds both academics and practitioners engaging in
the form of papers, models, reports from practice, posters or workshop
proposals that relate to the conference theme in its broadest sense. Your
paper(s) can focus on theory, practice or a combination of the
two. This conference will provide a great opportunity to meet others
with similar interests and to communicate with a wider audience, so we
really want to encourage you to participate.

Friday, August 15, 2014

Not all TV was bad during my stay in Washington. In the early part of my stay, suffering from jetlag, I managed to see a few excellent interviews on PBS TV during my wakeful hours around 2am!

The station I found most informative was WHUT-TV which is "a Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) member Public television station in the Washington, D.C. area. The station is owned and operated by Howard University, a historically black college. The studios are on the Howard University campus."Two interviews in particular I found revealing. The first was an interview by Charlie Rose with Bruce Riedel, whose new book 'What we won. America's secret war in Afghanistan 1979- 1989' has just been published by the Brookings Insitution Press:"On
sale July 28, Bruce Riedel's new book examines the most successful
intelligence operation in US history - the CIA's covert war in
Afghanistan."“We
are at the moment of truth in the future of Afghanistan,” said Bruce
Riedel, senior fellow and director of the Brookings Intelligence
Project, on The Charlie Rose Show. Learn more about his appearance on
the show and what he said about the future. See 'The Moment of Truth in the Future of Afghanistan'. I recommend viewing the interview to the end where some observations are made that left me very concerned.

The second interview was on 'Democracy Now' with Henry Siegman, Leading Voice of U.S. Jewry, spaeking on Gaza: "A Slaughter of Innocents". In this interview Siegman's description of how he arrived at his current position was particularly powerful, namely he asked the question: 'what would I do if I were in their [the Gaza Palestinians] shoes'? His conclusion is that he would do what they are doing. He goes on to reflect how Israelis acted when they were trying to create a homeland, and sees little difference in the nature of the actions.

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

I have just returned from two weeks in Washington DC, my first visit since a brief stay in 1990. Memories of my first visit are almost non-existent - all I remember is the anxiety and the admonitions to not walk alone on the streets. There are vague memories of staying in an elegant B&B in Georgetown and of sampling Ethiopian cuisine for the first time. My business and conversations remain opaque.

It was an intense but rewarding two weeks - I delivered three presentations and contributed to another plenary. In a later post I will say more about the substance of the conferences; here I want to post some vignettes, reflections, in no particular order, triggered by my two week stay.

1. Washingtonians consume a lot of coffee but it is not a cafe society ...in the sense of Melbourne, Rome or, increasingly, London. I came to this conclusion on a Saturday morning when with a friend we set off prior to breakfast for the Lincoln Memorial and a walk towards the Capitol. When hunger and need for coffee exerted its pull at about the Smithsonian there was not a coffee shop to be seen - despite lots of little booths...that did not open till 9.30am! We turned towards the city and its cavernous boulevards. Eventually a Starbucks appeared which we rejected in favour of something more interesting - but in the end all that could be found were other Starbucks!! Breakfast at Starbucks = not my idea of a cafe society! Unlike many other cities the sidewalks are underutilised for outdoor coffee and dining.

2. Arrival at Dulles Airport - how to get to Washington? Gave up the idea of public transport in favour of a shuttle which would deliver me straight to my hotel (a metro card for DC can't be purchased at the airport!). I was the last of nine passengers dropped off. At least I had begun to get my bearings; the driver, a recent arrival from Ghana, knew little more than me about Washington and would have been lost without his sat nav. But after a flight from Melbourne via LA it was not really what I wanted. The return was much easier, though finding out how to do it required persistence - the hotel staff did not know, and seemed unable to find out, how public transport operated with the newly opened metro line (the silver line). The combination of metro to Wiehle-Reston East station then Dulles International Silver Line Express bus (for only 7 miles) was efficient and not expensive.

3. Lights and airconditioners left on all day - if I switched them off those who did my room would switch them on again.

4. Breakfast at my hotel was a bizarre ritual - a small space, no flow for the items I needed or wanted to consume. It took days to work out how to sequence the events that were needed to get my breakfast! There were two TVs in the room (one on CNN) blasting out hyped up, pathetic reporting mainly about the Israeli-Gaza conflict and Ebola!

5. A colleague kindly took us to Mt Vernon, the home of George Washington for a day trip. It is only a few hours drive from Washington in the state of Virginia. It was an informative day out - one I would recommend, though it does have its perversities if one is open to seeing them. The view from the front verandah of Mt Vernon across the Potomac River is delightful and all the more so as the view is little disturbed from that which Washington and his family, employees and...... slaves would have enjoyed. As the land opposite is in the state of Maryland my thoughts immediately went to governance issues - what happened that the view was conserved given two different states were involved and given that by todays standards it is prime real estate? The answer is Piscataway Park, run by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior (National Capital Parks-East

"Situated along the Potomac River in Maryland, Piscataway Park was created to preserve the historic views from Mount Vernon, home to President George Washington, to Fort Washington. Piscataway Park is a natural area and is home to bald eagles,beavers, fox, osprey, and many other species."

But the park is only the outcome - the motivation came from Henry and Alice Ferguson who with friends puchased land, prevented development and eventually donated the land to the Park Service, a process not completed till the 1960s. Similarly the conservation of Mt Vernon was due to the action of private individuals who became the Mount Vernon Ladies' Association in 1853 and who continue to run the 500 acre site that has had over 80 million visitors since 1860.

To an Australian Mt Vernon is familiar - in the sense that it has the features of a colonial homestead that aspired to cater for European sensibilities. But by European standards it is a modest home, though the entire complex is convincingly retained and restored and enables the visitor an informative, interpretative experience...with one notable exception. Upon arrival at Mt Vernon a 25 minute video is shown in the new Ford auditorium - sponsored also by the Ford motor company it is very professional - a sort of biopic around aspects of the life of Washington. The jarring note for me concerned the segment referring to Washington's role fighting with the British as a colonial officer in the French and Indian war of 1754-63. In what is essentially a 'creation myth' for the USA the role of the indigenous Indians was written out. Thankfuly this would no longer be possible in Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Having viewed this video I also wondered how many Americans would make the connection between their struggle for independence and the Palestinian struggle for a land of their own.

6. The bookshops I found in DC were, by international standards, disappointing. I was sorry to miss the World Bank Bookshop - not open on weekends.

7. Colleagues and I had a great evening at Blues Alley in Georgetown. Akua Allrich and her three band members presented a delightful set.